Rudy Hobbs: Michigan GOP tries to rig the rules when it doesn't get its way

Nov. 8, 2013

Senate Bill 652 is a politically motivated attempt to move the Court of Claims under the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeals and allow the state's GOP-leaning Supreme Court to handpick the court's judges, says state Rep. Rudy Hobbs, D-Southfield. / File photo

Written by

Rudy Hobbs

Detroit Free Press guest writer

Rudy Hobbs

More

ADVERTISEMENT

If you donít like the rules of the game, just change them.

That seems to be the philosophy of Republicans in Lansing. Whether it is through their proposal to change how Michigan awards its electoral votes after Mitt Romney lost the state in last yearís presidential election, their passage of a referendum-proof emergency manager law after voters shot down the first one, or their contentious right-to-work tactics during last yearís lame-duck session, the state GOPís intentions seem clear: When things arenít going your way, just rig the system in your favor. Perhaps no example illustrates this partisan brinksmanship more than their most recent attempt to rig our judicial system.

Senate Bill 652 is a politically motivated attempt to move the Court of Claims under the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeals and allow our Republican-leaning Supreme Court to handpick the courtís judges.

This bill was fast-tracked to the governor in less than two weeks with little debate, the suspension of Senate rules, and only one committee meeting in each chamber, leaving many questions unanswered ó namely, why so fast?

The Court of Claims hears suits brought against the State of Michigan. Currently, the Court of Claims is part of the 30th Circuit Court in Ingham County ó because thatís where the state capital is located ó and is made up of publicly elected Ingham County judges. Republicans are unhappy with this because Ingham County leans Democratic. Therefore, claims of secrecy, lack of transparency and unconstitutional language brought against the stateís Republican leadership were given full consideration under this court.

So, the Republican solution to fix what they see as a stacked court against their agenda is to ensure that the court is stacked in their favor by allowing a Republican Supreme Court justice to choose who will rule on a case brought against them. It is rigging the system.

More concerning, however, is how this bill hinders due process and challenges our constitution. It creates a situation where individuals no longer have the guarantee of a trial by jury, where there is no right to appeal a decision up other than directly to the Supreme Court because of the conflict of interest in establishing the Court of Appeals as its own appellate division, and where this bill greatly expands the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeals through an amendment by reference ó which, for example, will now allow these Republican handpicked judges to hear cases against the governor and the state surrounding the Freedom of Information Act and the Open Meetings Act.

(Page 2 of 2)

This means that from now on, when you file a FOIA request to ensure transparency in the circumstances that led to an emergency manager in your city, or if you want to investigate an alleged violation of the Open Meetings Act by the state and your request is denied, you now will need to go to a Republican handpicked judge to try and get that request granted.

But most suspicious and egregious of all is that all cases currently pending and being held in the Court of Claims will be immediately transferred to this new handpicked judge, before a ruling is granted, where the trial will need to begin all over again. Plaintiffs will be delayed indefinitely until their new judge is up to speed. Justice delayed is justice denied.

This is the peopleís court weíre talking about, and this bill creates a stacked deck against the people.

Voters should be outraged, and the people deserve an answer from my Republican colleagues. Why was this bill needed, and why did it need to be done so hastily?

Iím not an attorney, only a teacher. But I learned at a young age how government is supposed to work, about the separation of powers and the three branches of government. I also learned at a young age that you donít always get what you want and itís never OK to take whatís not yours.

The peopleís court is being taken from them under this bill.

The new lesson is: If you donít like the rules of the game because youíre not getting youíre way, just change the rules. Is this the lesson we really want to leave for the next generation?